ArticlePloS one2025
The impact of latent tuberculosis screening programmes for migrant populations in high income, low burden countries.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Tuberculosis screening in young migrants from Mali: concordance between Mantoux and QuantiFERON® in Primary Care].Atencion primaria · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMigrants from high to low tuberculosis (TB) incidence countries may benefit from screening for latent TB infection (LTBI), but the optimal approaches and effectiveness are not well described.
methodsOur primary objective was to synthesise evidence for cost-effectiveness, and barriers and facilitators to successful implementation, of LTBI screening programmes for migrants entering high income, low TB burden countries. Evidence was synthesised using rapid review methodologies.
results41 studies (including 2 reviews) were included, covering the European region and national programmes. Main settings of LTBI screening were primary care, new arrivals clinics, and schools. The most frequently cited facilitator was structural cohesiveness (integration of health care services, collaboration with community partnerships, and co-ordination of care with social workers or accommodation staff). The most frequently cited barrier was lack of understanding and misconceptions of service users. Economic evaluations consistently demonstrated long term cost-savings for LTBI programmes. Screening migrants from countries of origin of the highest TB burden is more cost-effective but less likely to identify all TB and ultimately eliminate TB compared to screening at a lower TB burden threshold.
conclusionsWe found consistent evidence that LTBI screening programmes for migrants from high to low tuberculosis TB incidence countries can be effective and cost-saving in a variety of settings. A co-ordinated, integrated approach is a key programme facilitator.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.